AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Use of recovery vehicle for hire or

19th January 2006
Page 34
Page 34, 19th January 2006 — Use of recovery vehicle for hire or
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

reward costs operator £500 A LONDON operator w ho used a recovery truck to transport a vehicle that was not disabled has been ordered to pay £500 in fines and costs.

Linford Michael of Bermondsey: pleaded not guilty to the offences.

Prosecuting for VOSA. Anthony Ostrin told the Barking magistrates that Michael had been driving an Iveco recovery vehicle when it was checked at Dagenham. The vehicle had a gross weight of 7.5 tonnes and was carrying a Nissan flatbed pickup.

The vehicle was not displaying an 0-licence disc hut Michael said he did not need an 0-licence because the vehicle was a recovery truck.

Traffic examiner Robert Balmer told the court that in the circumstances the vehicle was not exempt from having an 0-licence or a test certificate. The vehicle being carried was not a disabled vehicle so the recovery truck was being used for transportation of a vehicle for hire or reward.

Finding Michael guilty, the magistrates said he was unable to show that the vehicle was disabled so the exemption did not apply.

Michael was fined £100 for having no 0-licence and f50 for having no test certificate with £350 costs.

Tags

Organisations: UN Court
Locations: LONDON

comments powered by Disqus